Hot4teacher, I think I have to agree, at least in th abstract. If the only thing a free kick accomplishes is to set the possession of the ball without a direct opportunity to score, then clearlly, the mere possession does increase the probability of future scoring even if only slightly, so calling it a penalty seems reasonable. I suppose the only other consideration is the reason the possession is handed over. If possession is handed over, say, simply out of fairness because the other team just scored, then it wouldn't be a penalty (please don't criticize if this doesn't actually happen. I know squat about sports rules. I know this happens in informal basketball games).

I think you miss my point. Referring to a single item in a list, singly, does not imply that it is the only item. referring to "call" instead of "calls" does not in any way negate the presence of the other items. The word "order" still applies reasonably.

Christian, have you ever stood in line? Oh wait, by your reasoning, that would be impossible. Even if there are ten people in line, no single person can be in that line. It would be meaningless to say that someone is third in line since lines can only have people as group in it. Even the saying "next in line, please" would be a non-sequitor. Poppycock.

Personally, I'd give McD's a little more credit. Do you really think that they were unaware of the nonstandard nature of "I'm lovin' it"? Quite the contrary, I think they RELIED on it. If their slogan was, "I love it", there would be no response at all to the ho-hum phrase. But, "I'm lovin' it", that's a little unsettling. The listeners' ears really perk up when they hear that: "gee did I hear that right? Let me listen more carefully. Aha, yes, they're trying to be clever" and, voila, a memorable ad is born.

Also, what about the country song, "I cain't stop lovin' you"?

Actually, lastronin, "followings" as a plural noun suggests two or more groups of "followers" of possibly two or more leaders. E.g., "Both Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell have large followings. The Reverend Sun Yung Moon's following was notably large in comparison"

Sorry, James, both "I" and "a" are words, shorter than "go". They're not full sentences, but they're definitely words!

Ok, you're in a restaurant. During dessert, your server comes to the table and says: "Would you like some more coffee?" You think for a moment, then reply: "I wouldn't mind that at all, why thank you." Now I ask you, does that exchange sound at all awkward to any of you? I think not. "Don't mind if I do" is just an informal way of saying the same thing.

When someone offers something, expressing that you wouldn't (or don't) mind isn't rude at all. If anything, it's a natural consequence of our upbringing. We're taught from an early age to downplay our desires, not "I want" or "can I", but "may I please". It's just a socially acceptable way of expressing a desire in a more roundabout way. Of course, there's nothing wrong with just "yes, please", but "don't mind if I do" with an elided "I" is an even less direct, and, therefore, perhaps more gentile way of asking for more.

It's very telling, hot4teacher, that one of your pet peeves is the misuse of "who" and "whom", considering that you use "whom" incorrectly in your very first sentence. It's also odd that you're pissed off by people using the word "forums". Are you really claiming that "forums" isn't a standard or "correct" English word? Fora is a Latin plural, correct English, yes, but obscure at best.

More discussion of this here:

http://painintheenglish.com/?p=4191

I don't understand your objection to "shot to death" at all. There's a logical fallacy in comparing it to "shot to life". You've neglected to consider the excluded middle; i.e., John Doe could well have been shot but not killed.